Skip to main content

tv   This Week With George Stephanopoulos  ABC  June 24, 2012 9:00am-10:00am EDT

9:00 am
good morning. welcome to "this week." summer showdown. over the "fast and furious" scandal. >> come to order. >> contempt of congress. contempt of congress. >> the president's claims executive privilege. >> it's our hope that we can somehow find a way through this. >> while a house panel holds the attorney general in contempt. >> who knew about "fast and furious"? when did they know about it. >> can the attorney general survive? will this hurt the president as he fights for re-election. we'll ask the man leading the charge against the attorney general, republican darrell issa. chair of the house oversight committee and xavier becerra who joinso joins our powerhouse roundtable.
9:01 am
the provocative new essay about women still cannot have it all. we got the most debate and the best analysis. good morning, george stephanopoulos has a well deserved morning off. here to discuss this stand-off between the president and the congress we're joined by the chair of the house oversight committee, darrell issa. good morning. >> thank you for having me. >> i have a lot of questions. let's take a quick look at ou we got to this point. just like the movie it was named after, it was fast, furious and deadly. the operation -- u.s. government agents allowed guns to pour across the border in mexico in an effort to track drug car tells.
9:02 am
but they lost track of those guns. two of those weapons were found at a murder scene of border patrol agent terry. congress outraged launched an investigation. but the justice department first denied the program existed. quote, atf makes every effort to interdict weapons that have been purchased illegally and prevented from mexico. they later admitted it was a mistake. the questions that republicans still want answered, who authorized the program and why was congress initially misled? which takes us to the stand-off. the discussions about the program are confidential, so the president evoked executive privilege. meanwhile congress is threatening to hold the attorney general in contempt.
9:03 am
congressman darrell issa, this is an mess. democrats say they're not negotiating in good faith. on tuesday when you met with the attorney general, he offered you documents including some of them aren't covered by the sue pibpo. you ejected the agreement. >> this started off by getting answers on the senator. how did terry become to getting killed. but we got here mostly because after denials we started getting these things. these are examples of the kind of discovering that we got for quite a while. you can't rely on them answering questions. one of the problems is, last tuesday, 11th hour, after an exchange of e-mails, they said,
9:04 am
let's have the meeting. i had the meeting. they came with nothing. not even an offer in the form of a piece of paper. what they said orally was, we'll brief you, we'll then you give the information that we believe supports that briefing. but you have to first agree to dismiss your subpoenas and your contempt. we can't do that. you can't play liar's poker. when you're looking into this kind of crime. when you're looking into the cover-up. remember it was deny, delay and recuse. that's what we have been dealing with since of february the 4th of last year. >> one of the knocks is that you're partisan. gun-walking as you know wasn't invented in the obama administration. it took place under president bush. operation wide receiver, the hernandez case. and fernandez case. >> there are these other cases and each one is slightly
9:05 am
different. >> why not call before your committee, republicans, the justice department, the attorney general during president bush's time, why not call them to get to the heart of the matter? >> jake, 76 pages. no problem with them voluntarily give us a lot of things in terms of incrimination. our subpoenas cover that information. the whole point of this thing is, when you do something wrong and lie about it as a young person, you can't say, oh, after you get caught, my brother did it, too, but there are things that we didn't approve of. but the point is, we're past that part of the discovery, relative to contempt. we know that there's lot of wrong things. what we're talking about now, when we get lied to, when the american people get lied to,
9:06 am
there can't be oversight when there's lying. the supreme court held pretty clearly, there cannot be executive privilege over criminal cover-up. or cover-up of crime. lying to congress is a crime. we have every right to see documents to say, did you know? what did you know? including, even the president. >> i understand you're sending a letter to the president about his invocation about executive privilege. >> jake, they're in fact have prepared a letter. we'll send it out probably today or tomorrow. that breaks down the points of why the president's executive privilege claims is overbroad or simply wrong. our hope is, as to least a lot of these documents including the documents often referred to as 1300, offered to us in this deal, at least since those were offered to us, that the president would see them. if the documents say what eric
9:07 am
hold holder says, we might dismiss contempt. if we get documents that do show, cast some doubt, or allow us to understand this, we'll at least delay contempt and continue the process. we only broke off negotiations when we got a flat refusal when we asked to get information. >> president bush's evoked executive privilege at least three times. explain to why executive privilege was okay for president bush but not okay for president obama. >> jake, i also serve on judiciary. so we saw those executive privilege argument going on and we saw the whole question of what congress was trying to get
9:08 am
to and i had some problems with the bush administration. attorney general gonzalez and i did not have a good relationship. i thought that he ill-served his president and i said so at the time. there were mistakes made. ultimately, i respect executive privilege if it's top executives speaking, preparing to the president, but in this case, the president has already said and the attorney general under oath has said, they weren't communicating -- >> that's not what bush said. the bush administration argued that executive privilege covered documents within a cabinet agency. he said that this is from mukasey -- it wasn't just for presidential communications. >> well, if we want to look at
9:09 am
the supreme court, in nixon, they made it very clear, even the president and certainly all of the agencies, cannot hold back information related to covering up criminal activities or talking about them. that's what we're looking for here. we're looking for how the american people were lied to on february 4th, 2011 and ten months passed before the truth came out from the administration. if the communication during that ten-month period between an outright lie and other activi activities that went on, and when they finally owned up to the fact, yes, they did let gun walks. speaker boehner was very good in the process of saying, let's make sure we only focus contempt on that which we absolutely need. the documents we seek are by definition narrow. >> last question for you congressman, you seem to suggest
9:10 am
that "fast and furious" may be a deliberate attempt to make the case for stronger gun laws. here you are in april, speaking at a nra convention. >> what they were thinking of was in fact to use this -- this walking of guns in order to promote an assault weapons ban. many thing so. they haven't come up with an explanation. >> you really think there's a possibility they were sending guns across the border to mexico? because they were trying to push gun control? >> two things quickly, first of all, this was so flawed, you can't expect they could get criminal prosecutions because of it. the level of flaw here is huge. here's the real answer as to gun control, we have e-mails from people involved in this that are talking about using what they're
9:11 am
finding here to support the basically weapons ban or greater reporting. chicken or egg? we don't know what came first. we do know during this "fast and furious" operation, in their e-mails, we can use this as part of additional reporting. so, the people involved saw the benefit of what they were gathering. whether or not that was their original purpose. >> thank you so much for coming in today. as our powerhouse roundtable takes their seats, enjoy the late-night comedies. >> -- any president in the last three decades. >> excellent excuse, everybody. executive privilege. it's virginity, you try to hang on to it for as long as possible
9:12 am
and then you're like let me have a little executive privilege. >> fast and furious was a waste of money to promote senseless acts of violence. >> i don't know what's scarier that we can't see the documents or they're naming it by the operation vin dee diesel. thanks one and all for being here. george, does the president have a leg to stand on when it comes to his claim of invocation of executive privilege. >> yes. darrell issa has an argument, also, his committee of oversight and government reform has a right to oversight. and there's a tension here. there's no clear doctrine about
9:13 am
executive privilege. doesn't appear anywhere in the constitution. the first president to implement this, after the battle of wabash which is ohio, congress wanted documents, president washington said that you can't have them. he relented. he wasn't a relenting man. next, another general, eisenhower who tried to stymie the investigations of mccarthy. the fact is, there's no clear doctrine, the courts aren't going to step up and write one. they're going to call this a political argument. this will played out way past november. >> hilary, isn't that true? this will probably be kicked down the road until after the election? >> it will. this likely will be appealed to a court. eric holder, the corner general
9:14 am
saw this mistake. border control is a dangerous occupation. dumb program made it more dangerous. they closed this program down. he has taken responsibility for it. he has apologized. he has made documents available. he testified on the hill something like nine times. this is nothing more than a political witch hunt that is taking up ridiculous amounts of republican house time when they should be doing other things. >> congressman. >> jake, i think george is right. oversight is the congress' responsibility. what we have here is overreach. this committee has had ample opportunity to get all of the documents they need to figure out what this operation was about. now we're going into other things. now, this committee is trolling for all sort of stuff doing an election year. i think george is right. after november it's going to disappear. it's unfortunate. while we should be talking about
9:15 am
jobs, student loans interest rates going up, here we are, witch hunt. fishing expedition. >> peggy, there's everyday that republican leaders in the house were not particularly enthused about this investigation or this issue, this doesn't help as much the conversation about the unemployment rate? >> i think that's exactly what they wanted to be talking about, economic issues presidential campaign right now, i think the administration made a bad mistake. i think throughout the 15, 16 months of this investigation, they tried to stone wall congress. they angered congress. i think the republican leaders weren't in a hurry to get onboard this thing. didn't want to push it as an issue. eventually, they said congress being dissed if you will, by the executive. i think it looks bad. i think we always, all of us in
9:16 am
politics and journalism learn every year, stonewalling isn't a good idea. we keep that in our heads in the abstract. i think that's the mistake they made. >> major, you could hear congressman darrell issa playing the best card he had. this letter from 2011 from the department of justice contained false information and they didn't correct it for ten months. and isn't that a classic line of washington? you admit it as soon as you can, you're contrite and you give the information out on your own terms. >> it conveys both internally to your department willing to accept responsibility when mistakes were made. the justice department did not do that. there's no fact, record, that indicated that the justice department was contrite or transparent, until forced to be either contrite or largely
9:17 am
transparent by this oversight committee. that's a fact. the politics as indicated by the panel. the house democrats believe that there was a family victimized. the terry family. house republicans are willing to stand with the terry family. the white house, democrats are more than willing to say, the economic doldrums this appears to be a useless, fruit leless t. if the president is going to assert executive privilege, he should do it that's historically done. you have to provide a log. then with a log, the court can administer a ruling on the validity of that assertion. >> that's true. justice department is willing to provide general categories for
9:18 am
documents that they're withholding as opposed to log each one. >> this is being played on in a -- the president rewrites immigration law by executive fiat. we must shield the secrets here regarding "fast and furious," there's leaks on security matters appearing on the front page of "new york times." finally mr. holder himself, has made himself obnoxious to republicans, that photo i.d. laws constitute voter suppression, if you have to present when you vote a photo i.d., the way you have to present a photo i.d. to get into the holder's issue. >> this is why the republicans don't like eric holder. because he has challenged voter i.d. laws. because he has challenged the
9:19 am
arizona, you know, discriminatory immigration law. because he has refused to implement the diskrcriminatory anti-marriage law. you know, eric holder has shown a lot of backbone in the justice department and the republicans hate it. so, what do they do? they call for his resignation. they throw out the document request. they throw more and more at him to distract him from doing the things that actually the president and the people hired him to do. >> let the record show, the supreme court justice, stevens, there's no controversial flaw in the photo i.d. >> 13 states, george, have instituted new statutes since 2010, purely for the purpose of limiting vote. >> to legal voters. let's take a turn to the
9:20 am
news that's coming down the pike. security dixs. i hear some congressional sound on this issue. >> court throws out the entire law and the house will vote to repeal whatever is left of obama care. >> let's hope and pray that we have a decision based on the matters and the constitution of the united states. congressman garrett, you're still optimistic, that the roberts court will rule in favor of upholding health care as well as striking down the law. let's talk about health care, why are you optimistic. >> because we took a bold step, something seven presidents before president obama tried to do, something this country has been fighting to get, for quite some time and all of a sudden now, that we have the elements in place to start this moving
9:21 am
forward, the court may step in. i think a lot of folks are wondering what this supreme court is trying to do. we saw the decision that allowed secret money to come into campaigns. now the supreme court goes further and said, we're going to overturn a law that has a personal responsibility requirement to it. that we have seen in other aspects of our nation and society. they'll wonder, if this supreme court ruling trying to justice for all of us? a political body just the way congress and the white house is. i think at this stage, what we find, millions of americans have already benefited from the elements of this historic reform and i believe that most americans will say, we're never going to go back to those days my child could be deny to buy health care insurance because he or she has a pre-existing condition. >> peggy, the health care law is not popular. the individual mandate is not popular. but other parts of the health care law are popular.
9:22 am
pre-existing conditions. let children 25 and under stay on their parents' plan. is there not a risk for republicans with this? if the court strikes it down, it's a horrible story for the administration. is there another story. >> two parts. one is, if the court strikes down the mandate or the whole bill, i think it will be a political disaster for the administration. italy say, essentially, we have been in a four-year crisis. the president spent the first year and a half of that crisis, giving his time and effort to something that wasn't even constitutional. that will be quite dreadful for him. what's interesting about it is part two, i don't see the republicans on the hill know what they do afterwards. what is their plan? i don't think the democrats know
9:23 am
what their plan "b" is. lot of movement and action at some point. at least after the election to figure out something and i suspect that it may be bipartisan. unlike this obama care deal. >> couple of things. the court cares about benefits but as an abstraction. not delivered by the federal government. they care about the constitution. and they care in this case about the reach of the congress claus. this case, how it's decided will define for the next 100 years the reach of the congress clause. this court knows that. what is the congress clause mean? what does it mean partially in a globalized economy? >> secondly, i regarded health care, as 32-ounce red bull, an energy drink for both parties. whatever the court decides, two more since out of that red bull.
9:24 am
it energizes all political actors on health care. >> on october 22nd, 2009, nancy pelosi was famously asked is the mandate constitutional? are you serious, are you serious? i think such is the political culture of the congress, since the great society in the 1960s, that it's unintelligible that we have a limited government. what the court is now been trying to do for six, seven, eight weeks is draft a limiting principal on the reach of what congress can do on the mere pretense. >> it's worth pointing out, that actually the individual mandate was originally a republican idea. democrats wanted an employer mandate. it would have been clearly constitutional. what we're talking about is, how
9:25 am
do you pay for the 34 million people who are without insurance and for those extra benefits that peggy articulated? the issue -- this bill falls apart because the supreme court knocks it down it's on the republican head, what happens to those people, it behooves them and mitt romney as their leader coming up with a solution. >> okay, i have to take a break. lots more to come from our roundtable. ♪ i feel so close to you right now ♪ the candidates cozy up to latino voters. will immigration be a key issue in november? can mitt romney make any inroads with these voters? plus, the atlantic magazine you courts controversy, women can't have it all. all of the latest in the
9:26 am
veepstakes up next. >> it many to romney's campaign is now thoroughly vetting candidates for mitt romney. lot different than john mccain. remember, it was very quick.
9:27 am
this is new york state. we built the first railway, the first trade route to the west, the greatest empires. then, some said, we lost our edge.
9:28 am
well today, there's a new new york state. one that's working to attract businesses and create jobs. a place where innovation meets determination... and businesses lead the world. the new new york works for business. find out how it can work for yours at impact wool exports from new zealand, textile production in spain, and the use of medical technology in the u.s.? at t. rowe price, we understand the connections of a complex, global economy. it's just one reason 75% of our mutual funds beat their 10-year lipper average. t. rowe price. invest with confidence. request a prospectus or summary prospectus with investment information, risks, fees and expenses to read and consider carefully before investing.
9:29 am
lots more roundtable from the newseum in washington, d.c., after this from our abc stations.
9:30 am
9:31 am
♪ we are family ♪ i got all my sisters a warm welcome to tagg romney. the romney boys? it's like you're 98 degrees or something. we have a photo here of a family gathering of the romneys. absolutely incredible. you can tell when you guys get together, there's a global shortage. all boys. all boys. is one of you a girl being raised as a boy? >> does anyone want to take this one. >> romney's five brothers there.
9:32 am
their first group interview with conan o'brien. and we're back with our roundtable. george, i want to talk about the latino vote. a big week for president obama and mitt romney, going after latino voters. you're skeptical that he can make inroads with this key demographic. >> i am. if you don't like the news go out and make some of your own. when you're challenging an incumbent president, he can do that. he made news with the rewriting of the law. romney's disadvantage, he has to unring a bell that he did on ine primaries, governor romney from new england is much more severe about immigration than reagan, mccain or either bush president was. all four of those coming from border states.
9:33 am
so, the president has a double advantage here. >> i think he is. peggy, he's the most conservative republican nominee on the issue of illegal immigration and the mexican border than any republican nominee that we have seen in the last 20, 30 years. >> i don't suppose he has any illusions that he can make preliminary progress with the latino vote. i suspect that he's just thinking that maybe he could hold obama's majority down somewhat. >> you're an latino voter, i don't think your vote is up for grabs. >> i'm listen zblg one arguments from the romney campaign, illegal immigration isn't the only issue. latino unemployment is 11%. they're on a social issues more conservative than the average democratic voter. doesn't he have a case to make? >> he should have a case to
9:34 am
make. economy, education, always come out above of unemployment when you pool them. he's now trying to play hide and seek on the whether he supports what the president did for all of those young americans, the dreamers. at the same time, i think it was very telling, in miami, the heart of republican latinos, where you find more than anywhere else, mitt romney goes and speaks to a crowd, he gets polite applause. barack obama goes into miami and he gets standing ovation from a crowd of mostly latino officials. it's become clear for mitt romney it's trying to sketch his way out of what he said in the primaries. he still associates with these guys that are so conservative. tell me with whom i walk and i tell you who are.
9:35 am
he walks with russell pierce, wilson, all folks identified in the latino community as being anti-latino. >> the republican response when president obama unveiled his baby dream act -- temporary dream act. there wasn't, well, tell us. >> what i found most interesting about the republican reaction it was especially in the context of immigration, quiet, calm and reserved. there was, what took the president so long? >> comparatively? >> that tells me two things. he quickly sent out an alert, we have to hold our own on this. secondly, if we can't endorse this, let's not denounce it instantly. maybe raise some questions about the process. but let's not denounce it.
9:36 am
he's trying to keep a lid on the pressure cooker. for him and his political future is the first priority. do no harm. so you can have a second conversation with the latino voter. do the demographic advantages which the president possesses are they affirmative for him to being reelected. ? right now, mitt romney is running in the low 20s. if he doesn't get to 40, he doesn't have a chance. the only way he can to get there is economic. >> hilary, one of the reasons that the latino vote is so important it's so big in key battle ground states. not only florida, but nevada, one of the problems with latino voters, they don't go to pools as much as democrats want to.
9:37 am
>> the obama campaign has done a good job of identifying and how to get them here. here's the issue, it may end up being the economy that drives them to vote. as the congressman said, the sense of who's with you on the economy is also going to matter. and so, when you have mitt romney talking about, you know, tax cuts for the wealthy and trickled down economy, you know, that doesn't give people who are most focused on aspirational goals, rise prg the middle class, looking at, you know, at their kids' education costs, you're still not talking their language and i think that's a key issue, beyond just the immigration issues president obama has a leg up. >> what i think is the biggest casualty in mitt romney's year in trying to deal with immigration, senator marco rubio. mitt romney threw marco rubio
9:38 am
under the bus. >> how so? >> what he would be willing to do on the dream act. he has said, it's radioactive. if what the president did is a baby dream act, what marco rubi was going to do was still enutero. >> speaking of marco ruibo our own john karl, romney and his campaign, they were not vetting marco to be vice president. and here was mr. romney's response. >> there was a story that originated today apparently at abc, based on reports of supposedly outside unnamed advisers of mine, i can't imagine who such people are, i can tell you this, they know nothing about the vice presidential selection. the story was entirely false.
9:39 am
marco rubio is being thoroughly vetted as by our process. >> is it really beyond the realm of possibility that jon karl's report was correct, that marco rubio was not being vetted? >> i assume it was correct. because it was correct the romney campaign immediately changed course. look, i don't nomar koe is the answer to the problem, 3.5% of hispanic americans are of cuban background. i don't know the extent to which this is one group that would respond to marco rubio. if the hispanic vote is so elusive for mitt romney, then he has to stress the middle west.
9:40 am
he comes up against the problem that got all of the republican governors in the midwest, in ohio, in pennsylvania, wisconsin, michigan, iowa and all of these republican governors are saying, it's working, the economy is improving. so, that's embarrassing the romney campaign from the other side. >> hilary, a moment of candor, who's the last person that you want mitt romney to select vp? >> if i'm mitt romney or me? >> i think probably someone like tim pawlenty is a good choice for him. someone who is going to probably be experienced and not make noise. when i was watching romney on the campaign trail up in new hampshire, i saw this nice little bromance between the two, they seemed to have chemistry. you look at the choices. none of them really add to something to romney. look, as democrats we have
9:41 am
enough to run against with mitt romney. so, if he adds something more for us in his vice presidential candidate, that's just gravy to us. >> peggy, who would you pick if you were mitt romney. >> every time that the romney folks have so absorbed the lesson of sarah palin from four years ago, don't go broad, pick a sxhal group of people and drill really deep into their lives. i think rob portman is one of those -- >> the senator from ohio. >> the senator from ohio with a great deal of experience and accomplishment. everybody says that would be doubling down on almost romney picking a romney sort of person. i think it would just be doubling down on a certain kind of seriousness. another thing comes with portman, portman has a great ability to debate. as you know, in a previous presidential cycles, he has, as
9:42 am
a republican, played the part of the democrat, the republican candidate would be debating. in debate rehearsals. everyone said, he's been talking for years, he's so brilliant, funny and bright. imagine someone taking those particular talents, being them into 2012 as a vice presidential candidate and facing joe biden. >> what do you think that would do in. >> i think joe biden is a very charming, but sometimes surprising and gaffe-prone person. i don't think anyone has pushed at him in 3 1/2 years. i think rob portman just might e vision rate him. this growing administration as a house of cards. >> major? >> well, as far out on this
9:43 am
limb. the night of the pennsylvania primary, that romney would pick rob portman. romney didn't call me. that's my sense what i know about governor romney. i think that's the first and foremost qualification for mitt romney. someone who in washington knows the three most important dimensions of economic in washington. budget, taxes and trade. rob portman knows them all. he's very well connected among republicans and democrats and he brings something that governor like pawlenty doesn't bring. that sense, that instains you sense of what's possible, and how to work the system. i believe mitt romney, if he's serious about this, he'll look at portman. >> congressman, as a democrat, who's the person you fear the most in terms of a vice
9:44 am
presidential pick? >> i'm not sure there's someone out there i would fear the most. i think certainly without ohio, romney can't win the president. >> right guy, solid guy. he would help mr. romney in ohio. but, mitt romney has to win florida, he has to win ohio, probably has to win virginia, he has a choice to make, to some degree, i think he'll be driven by what he has to win more so what he should do to get a solid vp to run with him. >> more of the roundtable. we'll be back with 60 seconds. can women have it all? the atlantic magazine cover that has everyone talking. and hbo's "the newsroom." debuts tonight. will you be watching?
9:45 am
>> who?
9:46 am
♪ sure used to be. stood up for what was right. fought for moral reasons. we passed laws. struck down laws for moral reasons. we sacrificed. we cared about our neighbors. we put our money where our mouths were. because we were informed. first step in solving any problems is recognizing that there is one. america's not the greatest country in the world anymore. the newsroom premiering tonight on hbo. latest from aaron sorkin george, i didn't let you pick your vice presidential nominee for mitt romney.
9:47 am
>> my choice, decidedly he would be president of purdue university that ice mitch daniels. pawlenty. ryan would be good. so, by default and that's not to disparj him, i would go with bob j jindal. let's turn to this atlantic cover story, why women still can't have it all? by a former state department official. hilary, we have read this. what did you think of it? >> two things for context, the first is, 2/3 of mothers in america today are actually primary or co-bread winners for their family. the second is, i think men are increasingly feeling this pressure. i don't want you to feel left out. that brings us to a problem,
9:48 am
this issue really has to move beyond party talk, angst and philosophy to some place that gets our country moving forward. we're one of two countries in the developing world that don't have paid family leave. that doesn't have flexible mandated work hours. that does not have federally-supported child care. those issues have been women's issues but they're economic issues. >> peggy? >> oh, i think you can't legislation late away some of life's limits and joys. i think that, interesting article in the atlantic, it seems to me that it's focusing on how women are doing in the world. in business. in the professions. what percentage of people we
9:49 am
have -- of women we have in state department? are we slipping and such? it takes a slightly limited view of what women are. what choices they have and what they might be? it's somewhat limited in its canvas, i suppose, i forget where i'm going with that beyond, it is good to remember that -- it's good to work with children. it's good to be in the house, in the office, all of these things are good. you can't try to lejs late it to close. >> somebody who leaves early on friday because they're an observant jew.
9:50 am
george? >> men can't have it all, either. but, she gives us a perfect expression of the progressive mind. i still strongly believe that women can have it all, but not today, not with the way xheshg's economy and society are currently structured. if you'll restructure everything, everything is possible. >> congressman? >> i don't think that's what she's saying. i believe what she's saying the playing field is not level. i still care more about family than most men do. lot of men are beginning to care a lot more about family. the reality is, you and i, george, we could take advantage of our careers. women are more willing to sackry fiegs their career for family. not only poignant for her to stress these things, wait until you go back to working-class
9:51 am
american, raising the families, those doctor the heroes of america. >> major in. >> my mother was an executive with at&t back in the '60s and '70s. she was respected many women who she brought up in at&t. the biggest difference between now and then, my mother worked 9 to 5. >> your voice, this week, is coming right up. but first -- ♪ >> a trip into our video vault. three moments from this week's history. what year was it? >> time has run out for saddam hussein. >> the bush administration prepared the public for the invasion of iraq. >> what should the public right now what about a war in iraq. >> it would be something under
9:52 am
$50 billion. >> some estimates say up to $00 million. >> then that sadly false banner, "mission accomplished." tragedies in the sky over texas. >> 24 hours ago, the space shuttle columbia lost contact with mission control and the year concluded -- >> the acapture of saddam hussein. we'll be right back with the answer. my specialty is pastries, not predictions. knowing what to make and when could help cut down on thousands of unsold baked goods per month. using analytics, we discovered when it's drizzling outside... people eat more cake. and when the temperature rises, panini sales go up.
9:53 am
finding these hidden connections helped our european bakeries increase profitability by up to 20%. let's build a smarter planet. you know how hard if yit can be to breathedo, and what that feels like. copd includes chronic bronchitis and emphysema. spiriva helps control my copd symptoms by keeping my airways open a full 24 hours. plus, it reduces copd flare-ups. spiriva is the only once-daily inhaled copd maintenance treatment that does both.
9:54 am
and it's steroid-free. spiriva does not replace fast-acting inhalers for sudden symptoms. tell your doctor if you have kidney problems, glaucoma, trouble urinating, or an enlarged prostate. these may worsen with spiriva. discuss all medicines you take, even eye drops. stop taking spiriva and seek immediate medical help if your breathing suddenly worsens, your throat or tongue swells, you get hives, vision changes or eye pain, or problems passing urine. other side effects include dry mouth and constipation. nothing can reverse copd. spiriva helps me breathe better. does breathing with copd weigh you down? ask your doctor if spiriva can help. what year was it? after months of anticipation the iraq war began, the columbia mission ened in tragedy on a february morning. and saddam hussein was found. it was nine years ago.
9:55 am
2003. and now we honor our fellow americans who serve and sacrifice. the pentagon released the names of nine soldiers and ma reebs killed in afghanistan. in your voice this week, today's question comes from mike mcguire. what would be a priority for the white house if the president were re-elected the first priority will be fixing this fiscal cliff if the congress does not act. attend of the year, the bush tax cuts expire. there will be mandated budget cuts across the board because congress failed to reduce that deficit on that not so super super committee. after that mess, if reelected
9:56 am
president obama may turn to tax reforms since he could find common ground there with republicans. much depends on congress. if president obama wins a second term, no telling whether he'll have more allies in congress? and that's all for us today. check out "world news" with david muir tonight. thank you for sharing part of your sunday with us. george stephanopoulos will see you back here next week. ♪
9:57 am
9:58 am
9:59 am
[ male announcer ] for our families... our neighbors... and our communities... america's beverage companies have created a wide range of new choices. developing smaller portion sizes and more low- & no-calorie beverages... adding clear calorie labels so you know exactly what you're choosing... and in schools, replacing full-calorie soft drinks with lower-calorie options. with more choices and fewer calories, america's beverage companies are delivering.